I.The Jainas have
formulated a methodological scheme consisting of seven ways of looking at
reality. There was a problem whether the seven Nayas can be reduced in
number. There are three tradition. The first tradition adopts seven Nayas.
The second eliminates Naigama Naya and reduces the list to six. In the
third tradition we have five, as samabhirudha and Evambhuta Naya have been
subsumed under sabda Naya. Umasvati is largely responsible for the first
and the third traditions. In the Digambara version of the tattvarthasutra
seven ways have been mentioned, but the svetambara version given five
Nayas as mentioned in the third tradition. The different points of view
are the Nayas. Various Nayas have been mentioned. As shown above Umasvati
first mentions five Nayas and then adds the subdivision. The Agamas have
mentioned two points of view: I) samgraha Naya, the point of view of the
universal, the synthetic point of view and ii) paryaika Naya, the view
of the particular, the analytic point of view .

Siddhasena Divakara in
his sanmati Tarka adopted the two points if view and distributed the Nayas
under two heads. He described the six Nayas. But the generally accepted
classification of Nayas is sevenfold. Three of them refer to objects and
their meaning, and the others to the words. In the first category we get
three: I) samgraha Naya, ii) Vyavahara Naya, and iii) Rjusutra Naya.
Siddhasena Divakara says that samgraha and Vyavahara are subdivisions of
the Dravyarthika Naya. Samgraha Naya gives the synthetic point of view. It
gives, as
Radhakrishanan points out, the class point of view. In this, we seek to
approach the unity amidst the diversity by finding the common element in
the variety presented in the world. Absolute monism is the conclusion of
this point of view . Exaggerated emphasis on the universal would lead to
samarahabhasa; and samkhya and Adcaita schools of philosophy are notable
instances. The absolute emphasis on the one and unity dismissing all
diversity as appearance, is the position of the absolutists. The Jainas
maintain that such a point of view, if it is taken in the absolute sense,
presents a partial point of view.

Vyavahara Naya
is the empirical point of view. It is the analytic point of view. It
emphasises the diversity in the universe presented in the experience. We
know things in their details and emphasize their individually. The
attitude of the pluralists and the materialists is the outcome of the
view.

Rjusutra Naya
is narrower than the Vyavahara Naya, it looks at an object at a particular
point of time, and does not see the continuity of the thing. The Jainas
say that the Buddhist philosophy of ksanikavada is an example of the
Rjusutra Naya.

Naigama Naya
refers to the end or the purpose involved in the action. We interpret an
activity an activity with references to the end for which it is done. For
instance, a man who is carrying water and firewood will say that he is
cooking of he is asked what he is doing siddhasena Divakara adopts a
different point of view. Naigama Naya comprehends both the generic and
specific qualities.

Another
interpretation of Naya involves non- discrimination between the generic
and the specific elements of an object. For example, when we state � The
Bamboo grows here in plenty� the generic and the specific features of the
bamboo are not within the focus of our attention. The principal of
configuration and the Gestalt suggested by Gestalt school of psychology
holds goods in this case.

The non-
distinction is not, however, absolute and if the distinction is asserted
absolutely there would be a fallacy of Naigamabhasa.

Paryayarthika
Naya is the analytic point of view referring to the words and their
meaning. It is a verbal interpretation of the terms used. It has three
subdivisions: i) Sabda Naya, ii) Samabhirudha Naya, and iii) Evambhuta
Naya, Sabda Naya consists in looking at the functional importance of the
terms. The name has a function calling to our mind the object implied by
the name. However, we very often forget that the meaning of a term is
relative and varies with different contexts. We emphasize that the
meaning is fixed. That gives rise to fallacies. Samabhirudha Naya is the
application of the Sabda Naya. It refers to the roots of words. For
instance, raja as a person who shines is different from the nrpa, a person
who rules over men and protects them. Evambhuta not only sees the
difference between words with their different etymologies; but it sees the
difference between one and the same word, if it does not signify the
meaning denoted by the root in the word. For instance, there is a
difference between raja when he is shining and raja when he is not
shining. In this we give a word a fixed meaning, something by usage. For
instance, a �nut� has come to mean in English a showy man.